Sullcrom DC v Gibson Dunn DC Forum

[Anonymous User]

Title says it. Looking at white collar / investigations and am particularly interested in financial institutions stuff--sitting across the SEC / CFPB would be fun. Ideally, would like to exit to be an AUSA whenever that opportunity arises.

I think I know most of the upsides and such related to Gibson DC as it has been remarked upon a fair bit in these forums, but I am a bit uncertain about Sullcrom DC. The office is small, but they are not ranked in anything on Chambers so I am a little uncertain as to what their exact specialties are, though it seems that their institutional clients come from finance, which seems to overlay well onto my interests. I imagine that both firms would give me the experience to exit to an AUSA, but is there anything else I should be thinking about here? Free-market at Gibson, roughly free-market at SC. Both have the name prestige. Gibson is bigger, SC is smaller. Etc. Any insightful tidbits, especially about SC's DC office as compared to GDC DC would be great.

Thanks in advance. Posted anon because obvious.

[Anonymous User]

Don't really have anything substantive to add, but I think there's something significant to be said about being in an office that's a center of gravity for the firm vis-à-vis being at a satellite office. I don't know much about SullCrom's D.C. practice, but if it's small and doing primarily service work, I'd be weary of taking it over GDC.

[Anonymous User]

Have no idea how much this matters, if at all, but didn't Sullcrom DC just nab 3 SCOTUS clerks? Seems (maybe) indicative of something good? Of what, I don't know.

[Anonymous User]

Don't really have anything substantive to add, but I think there's something significant to be said about being in an office that's a center of gravity for the firm vis-à-vis being at a satellite office. I don't know much about SullCrom's D.C. practice, but if it's small and doing primarily service work, I'd be weary of taking it over GDC.

Original anon. I agree, I had similar qualms but see some upside to being in a satelite office, especially where there are more partners and counsel than there are associates. It seems like a decent career move if I have a much better opportunity to build relationships with folks at that level. Though, I am not sure if it is measurably different than similar opportunities at GDC (though I have to think it must be).

It sounded like they do some DC only matters, but that the vast majority is--as you said--service work. I imagine appellate work is mostly concentrated in DC, though I don't know if I have a strong interest in that anyway.

[Anonymous User]

Have no idea how much this matters, if at all, but didn't Sullcrom DC just nab 3 SCOTUS clerks? Seems (maybe) indicative of something good? Of what, I don't know.

I mean, doesn’t Jones Day nab like 8 or 9 at a time? Which is to say, I do not think number of SCOTUS clerks is generally that indicative of good places to work for non-SCOTUS people.

[Anonymous User]

Imo the right answer here is Gibson. Gives you many more options if you decide to expand beyond white collar but also if gives you incredible white collar opportunities...also just with Gibson Dc being much more established I think prestige wise and exit opportunities wise (esp to govt) it makes the most sense

[Anonymous User]

I know people at both. GDC definitely has a broader and more populated practice. I personally would choose GDC with very little hesitation here.

[Elston Gunn]

Haven’t followed developments in DC the last couple years, but I can’t see how this is even a debate. Gibson by a mile.

(Agree with poster above that the ability to offer gigantic bonuses to SCOTUS clerks does not indicate that a firm is good spot for a more “normal” candidate.)